Software Wiki - Sanity Check Requested

[Vyndree]

Can anyone who is more familiar with software boxing double-check the categorization I've done on http://www.dual-boxing.com/wiki/index.php/Software ?

I've moved the software programs into their individual categories and defined the categories at the top of the page for better clarity. The old page was just too nondescript to be useful to newbies. I've also added brief summaries (usually copy/pasted from the official websites with sources).

[Thulos]

Looking Good, but Octopus belongs in the Multiplexer & Multi-Machine Emulators category. I really can't comment on any of the others as I've only ever used keyclone and octopus.

[Vyndree]

Got it -- I tried to check the octopus wiki but a quick glance didn't tell me if it worked cross-computer.

I'll fix.

[Sarduci]

Looks correct to me.

[KvdM]

I've looked at the structure of the text itself and it would probably be better place the information in a table, because that will make it easier to get an overview of the different applications. Currently if I want to know what application is best for me to use, I need to look at three different lists and try to distil the information that I need from the comments and combine that into an overview before I'm able to make a comparison. A table with a structure like this:

Application name | multi-machine over network | multi-instance on one machine | Costs | Additional comments and/or link to the website

Would give me exactly the same info as the current list, but as an overview already. It will make comparing apps easier, but it will also make maintenance easier. Adding info about a whether an app supports a certain feature will become as easy as adding an extra column.

[Freddie]

I'd like to suggest a different approach. The two categories used on the Wiki page provide useful info, but that info is only useful up to a point. It tells us something about the programs but there is a great deal we don't learn. In addition those two categories have the drawback of being misleading because they make it appear as if multiboxing software is basically a form of hardware emulation. This may be true for some or all of the KM programs, but it's not true for the rest. The vast majority of features in Authotkey or HotkeyNet can't be duplicated by hardware, so if you think of them as hardware emulators, you're missing almost all of what they do. I think this is true also of Keyclone although probably not to the same extent.

So what I suggest instead is a table that lists the features that distinguish multiboxing programs from each other. The key is to compare the programs to each other, not to hardware, and to include the facts that distinguish them.

Here's a rough stab at such a table:

Can switch keyboard to remote PC(s) (No | server only | any PC )
Can switch mouse to remote PCs ( No | server only | any PC )
Can switch display to remote PC (No | server only | any PC )
Broadcasts selected keys over network ( no | white & black lists | itemized )
Nature of output ( keystrokes | keystrokes and complex scripted )
Interface ( GUI | scripts )
Picture in picture ( yes | no )
Round robin ( yes | no )
Range of games covered ( limited | unlimited )
Can broadcast mouse clicks to multiple windows on single PC ( yes | no )
Can broadcast mouse drags to multiple windows on single PC ( yes | no )
Can send keystrokes and commands to background windows ( no | poor | fair | good | excellent )
Provides user control over operating system ( no | poor | fair | good | excellent )
Script language power ( no | poor | fair | good | excellent )
Any key can be a trigger modifier ( Yes | no )
Maximum number of keys in trigger ( 2 | 3 | 4 ... 9 )
Output keystroke(s) can be different from trigger ( yes | no )
Output keystroke(s) can be different from each other ( yes | no )
Tiled screen management (i.e. Maximizer stuff ) ( yes | no )
Which machine is the controller? ( server only | all simultaneously )

[Freddie]

I wrote the previous message fast to give a general idea. Now I've had some coffee and rewrote it more carefully. I took care this time to include the two existing Wiki categories, but I rephrased them as the first two items under "Targeting." I also added third and fourth items to that category because I think it's a progression. The idea is, how precisely can the software target the destination to which you're sending output? To a PC as a whole; to a specific window; to a specific control in a window; and to a window even though it's in the background.

Probably I wrote this in a way that's too technical, but I think my language can be translated in a way that sounds more like features as seen by users.

KVM
-------------------
Switches mouse ( no | server only | any PC )
Switches keyboard ( no | server only | any PC )
Switches display ( no | server only | any PC )

Targeting
---------------------------------
Can send to connected PCs ( no | yes )
Can send to multiple windows on a PC ( no | yes )
Can send to individual controls in a window ( no | yes )
Can send to background windows ( no | yes )

Interface
------------
Graphical interface ( no | yes )
Script language ( no | yes )

Environment control
--------------------------
Can launch applications ( no | yes )
Tiled screen management (Maximizer stuff) ( no | yes )
Picture in picture ( no | yes )
Control over operating system functions ( none | poor | fair | good | excellent )

Output
-----------------------
Output can be different from trigger ( no | yes )
Different output can be sent to different targets with single trigger ( no | yes )
Key output ( single modified keystrokes | single modified keystrokes and text strings)
Mouse click output ( no | single window per PC | multiple windows per PC )
Mouse drag output ( no | single window per PC | multiple windows per PC )
Round robin
Key broadcast selection ( white and black lists | itemized )

Triggers
-----------
Any key can be a modifier ( no | yes )
Mouse buttons can be triggers ( no | yes )
Maximum number of keys in trigger (0 | 1 | 2...)
Accepts input from game controllers (e.g. Nostromo) ( no | yes )

Script language
-------------------
Loops ( NA | no | yes )
If-else ( NA | no | yes )
Variables ( NA | no | partial | yes )
User-defined functions ( NA | no | yes )

Other
-------
Range of games covered ( specific | unspecific )
Which PC is the controller? ( server only | all simultaneously )

[Vyndree]

[quote='Freddie',index.php?page=Thread&postID=93321 #post93321]The vast majority of features in Authotkey or HotkeyNet can't be duplicated by hardware[/quote]

The problem is, what cannot be duplicated by hardware is very often against the terms of use. I'm not saying EVERYTHING is against the terms of use, but many things are. I'm somewhat leery to promote features that can not be duplicated by hardware on the main page -- though it's fine to promote them on the individual software pages that provide them, I suppose.

As for moving things to a table, I'm somewhat concerned about putting too little information or incorrect information into this table. Software pricing changes, software features change -- which is why I've made the categories (multiplexer emulator, multi-machine emulator) as broad as possible. That way, when there are pricing/feature updates, we only have to update one single page (the software product's wiki page)

I think each individual piece of software should have a very clear table on the top of thier page outlining the features and the cost, and that the software page should give very general information about what each piece of software is, in GENERAL.

The page is blimped up enough as it is -- what I did was add brief 2-3 sentence summaries (usually ripped directly from the software websites -- with sources linked) and a link to the individual software's wiki page. I'm leaving it up to the gurus for each page to add the nitty gritty stuff, but [url='http://dual-boxing.com/wiki/index.php?title=Software&oldid=2749']our previous page was just a list of links with no descriptive information[/url].

Freddie -- can you take your chart that you've written and apply it to HKN and I'll see what I can do to make it into a table? (I'm not too familiar with it -- as you can see I already messed up octopus categorization earlier) We can use it as an example/template for each software page, and see how it looks or if it still needs changing.


EDIT: I've added a table to the software wiki that is VERY VERY VERY inaccurate. Why? Because I have no clue about software multiboxing -- I'm a hardware boxer.

If you're feeling up to it, feel free to add information directly to the table (I believe the examplies I attempted to muck together should help) or post on this thread and I'll update it. I just really don't know some of the software products besides what I've gathered from reading around here on the forums and the newbie forum.